Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Mary Wollstonecraft Challenges of Race and Class in Feminist Discourse
Mary Wollstonecraft Challenges of Race and Class in Feminist Discourse
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted
digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about
JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
The Feminist Press at the City University of New York is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize,
preserve and extend access to Women's Studies Quarterly
This content downloaded from 131.247.112.3 on Mon, 27 Jun 2016 09:55:44 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
MARY WOLLSTONECRAFT: CHALLENGES OF RACE AND
CLASS IN FEMINIST DISCOURSE
SALMA MAOULIDI
This content downloaded from 131.247.112.3 on Mon, 27 Jun 2016 09:55:44 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
MAOUUDI 281
This content downloaded from 131.247.112.3 on Mon, 27 Jun 2016 09:55:44 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
282 MARY WOLLSTONECRAFT
Wollstonecraft strongly opposes the view that women only exist to serve
men, a view expressed by dominant philosophers of her time and reli
gions and still retained in most legal systems. Sensualists justify the con
tinued denial of human and legal rights to women on the grounds of
intellectual incapacity. They confine women to the domestic sphere,
which is by its very nature mundane, where they are deprived of their
liberty and any prospects of excelling (20). Since women are denied the
ability to improve their faculties, they are perceived as not being intelli
gent enough to make their own decisions, thus justifying the need for
male protection, as is still advocated for by conservative forces in states
such as Saudi Arabia and religious entities such as the Vatican. Woll
stonecraft speaks to the dilemma women face as their worth is reduced to
their beauty and reproductive roles. Rendering women as weak and
powerless beings denies them their soul; they are merely appendages of
men, their rights and obligations accruing from their relationship to
men, as wives, mothers, or daughters.
Clearly a modernist and a feminist, Wollstonecraft mercilessly chal
lenges ideas from antiquity that pertain to women. She does not accept
that the low status of women is divinely ordained, since God made all
This content downloaded from 131.247.112.3 on Mon, 27 Jun 2016 09:55:44 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
MAOULIDI 283
things right. Rather, she argues, men use reason to justify prejudices that
breed inequality. She dismisses the biblical account of creation that posits
women as subjugated to men, derived as it is from the concept that
women originated in a man's rib. The most revolutionary aspect of her
treatise is her call for a new status for women?that of companions of
men. The relationship between the sexes should be founded on friendship
and respect; women should be regarded as full members of society. This
is critical because it rests on the important proposition that women are
rational beings and therefore endowed with intelligence. This assertion
turns on its head the age-old view propounded by philosophers, writers,
poets, and the clergy that women are weak and dependent creatures.2
Wollstonecraft's preoccupation is not only with emancipating
women; she wants freedom for all humankind (178). Significantly, she
notes how expediency compromises basic principles/natural rights even
when it seems illogical, unreasonable, to do so. The situation is more
critical in the absence of checks and balances to contain the actions of
men and rulers. Yet her political assessment of the use of force and poli
tics is confined not to the individual but to its social effect?maintaining
the social order. A class structure furthered through tradition, liturgy,
and ceremonies maintain the status quo. Wollstonecraft sees no hope in
relying solely on established practice or norms. Accordingly, she scorns
nobility and accuses it of using its status to demand blind submission,
thereby engaging in acts of tyranny.
This content downloaded from 131.247.112.3 on Mon, 27 Jun 2016 09:55:44 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
284 MARY WOLLSTONECRAFT
This content downloaded from 131.247.112.3 on Mon, 27 Jun 2016 09:55:44 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
MAOULIDI 285
This content downloaded from 131.247.112.3 on Mon, 27 Jun 2016 09:55:44 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
286 MARY WOLLSTONECRAFT
CONCLUSION
In many ways Wollstonecraft's treatise captures the inherent contradic
tion and timeless debates on rights: not all women face oppression to the
same degree?in one situation mistresses may prevail in affections and
even status, whereas wives and daughters are deprived of liberty (24).
Nor are all men powerful; power depends on social, economic, ethnic,
and other factors. Clearly, both men and women have greater options
than they did in Wollstonecraft's day, but such liberties and opportuni
ties are meaningless if tyranny rules.
NOTES
1. This evokes present-day distinctions between basic needs and strategic
needs/basic rights. Wollstonecraft argues that the weak motivation to guarantee
equal rights to women is the tendency to view only the present needs of women not
their future fate.
2. Still, one wonders how she would have reacted to the body of research that
suggests that there is indeed a difference in the intellectual abilities of men and
women and studies showing that girls perform better in schools that are segregated
by gender.
This content downloaded from 131.247.112.3 on Mon, 27 Jun 2016 09:55:44 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms